And again if the 4.9 is designed so poorly why does a 3800 s/c at 10 psi boost do 13.2 in the 1/4... and the 4.9 at 8 psi boost do 12.2 in the 1/4 ???????
Ive run 12.54 @ 9psi on a 3.25 pulley and street tires, untuned.
Even if your link was active I'd have a real issue with you right now, despite whatever you were hoping the video would prove. I was trying to play nice with everyone but your comment is more than enough to set anyone over the edge. Oh and the reason that the smaller displacement L6 in the video above is destroying that V8 vette is because of 1. Boost and 2. Toyota knows how to build a motor. IE: efficiency.
I'm not arguing with anyone about this any more, ever! If you feel that you need to place !!!4.9!!! liters in your car to get bass than you go for it. I don't plan on swapping in a motor that trips at 5K and won't pull a Fiero without serious work just to make boost effective. Oh and I'm sure it ran 100+ runs with a junkyard turbo and a jerry rigged, non tuned, setup....
Although I know this thread is all about 0-60 times, I have to say this, PBJ, about this little battle.
Lets talk SC vs Turbo for a second.
We all know that a roots type blower is one of the most inefficent ways of producing boost.
We also know that a well sized turbo will more than compensate for any small intake, small exhaust ported engine, as well as be more efficent than a hp robbing pulley supercharger.
1/4 mile doesn't tell the whole story... what about your MPH? Your speed at the end of the run determines really how efficent that engine is after all that torque falls off.
A 98 Dodge Viper GTS will run a 12.2 in the 1/4 but also hit 118 MPH while doing it.
So is the 4.9 Truely better than the 3800? Contrary to your results, I would have to say no.
FieroX just stated he ran a 12.5 at 9 psi with his SC setup. You ran a 12.2 at 8 psi with a Turbo setup and two extra cylinders.
They sound realatively close to me, which one sounds more efficent to you?
I've admired the Turbo setup you built for a long time, but it's not the be all end all, and without it, the 4.9 would be just another boat anchor after 4500 RPM.
Personally, give me a 3.4 DOHC with T3/T4 Hybrid and supporting mods... If torque you're concerned with on that engine, you're just not dropping the clutch at a high enough RPM.
IP: Logged
04:33 AM
PBJ Member
Posts: 4167 From: London, On., Canada Registered: Jan 2001
Originally posted by Emc209i: PBJ- PLease do not take this as a personal bash towards you.
I was trying to play nice with everyone but your comment is more than enough to set anyone over the edge. .... Toyota knows how .... I don't plan on swapping in a motor that trips at 5K and won't pull a Fiero without serious work just to make boost effective. Oh and I'm sure it ran 100+ runs with a junkyard turbo and a jerry rigged, non tuned, setup.... .:
Ok Emc209i you are an ignorant @@s If you watched the video you could here the 4.9 hitting the 6400 rpm redline. And personally who freeking cars about some Toyota engine especially on this forum, I certainly don't. My point about my junk yard turbo is that it can work for little to no money and also be successful and reliable....... "toyota" who cares.... go home.
Pete
IP: Logged
04:38 AM
topcat Member
Posts: 5486 From: Charleston SC Registered: Dec 2001
Originally posted by PBJ: I would say 100% your wrong! since you said "any situation"
I had less money in my 4.9 turbo than the 3800 s/c and the 4.9 turbo was 1 second faster in the 1/4 and lifted the frt tires, using the EXACT same transission.
The 3800 s/c with about 10 psi boost did 13.2 in the 1/4 mile The 4.9 turbo with 7-8 psi boost did 12.2 in the 1/4 mile
SO what does that tell you about an engine and boost with the same car and same transmission....hmm.
Please dont get me wrong, I really like the 3800 s/c IMO it is the best swap for the value, but it is not the only swap that HAS performed well.
You can all check out my build thead to see what it cost to build a 4.9 turbo-not that much.
Pete
This is the opinion that I value the most... PBJ has built and owned both SC3800 and 4.9 Fieros. I've neer driven or rode in a 4.9, but I have seen one pull out of a parking lot in a spirited manner. It was impressive.
You insult me, post a link to a non working video, and then call me an @ss for not watching a video that you posted a dead url for. You can't spell cares and then you ask why I care about a 2JZ-GTE.
I'm sure you don't care, that's why you drive a 4.9; so you can tell anyone and everyone that you drive a V8, one of the worst designed and produced by GM in my oppinion. But this isn't about the motor, its about you, its about why the motor has a bad name, its about why you begin insulting as soon as someone questions the validity of the 4.9's equallity. Like I said you keep going for the wow factor and ignoring supercars, technology, and advanced enineering all together. Leave the discussion to people who do care about things such as effeciancy and design like Fiero-X and others.
One last quib: "My point about my junk yard turbo is that it can work for little to no money and also be successful and reliable" - This statement is flawed, infactual, and skewed.
I am not returning to this thread- it is garbage and you have more than proved that.
IP: Logged
06:02 AM
86GT3.4DOHC Member
Posts: 10007 From: Marion Ohio Registered: Apr 2004
Personally, give me a 3.4 DOHC with T3/T4 Hybrid and supporting mods... If torque you're concerned with on that engine, you're just not dropping the clutch at a high enough RPM.
You can have mine for the right price
Who gives a damn which engine is more efficient or how much boost you have to put out of a 4.9 to do what, the question was whats quicker off the line, a "slightly built" 4.9 VS 3.8SC. Not 3.8 N/A not turbo'ed 4.9.. Not a difficult question.
I cant believe no one has 0-60 times for either engine in a near stock form. If I owned a stopwatch I would just go outside and time mine now jeeze.
IP: Logged
06:47 AM
jstricker Member
Posts: 12956 From: Russell, KS USA Registered: Apr 2002
I cant believe no one has 0-60 times for either engine in a near stock form. If I owned a stopwatch I would just go outside and time mine now jeeze.
I found a calculator once that converted 60' time at the track, to 0-60 time. My best 60' time was when i was supercharged, was 1.579. This calculated to 2.90 0-60. My car would shift into 2nd gear at 45 mph, which would happen right at the 60' mark. So imagine 0-45 in less than 1.6 seconds. Theres my vote.
[This message has been edited by fieroX (edited 03-22-2007).]
IP: Logged
08:37 AM
vafierro Member
Posts: 349 From: Newport News, VA Registered: Oct 2005
Typical. I should have known this was going to turn into a flame war. I'm headed off to the shop to machine a flange for my turbo exhaust manifold. Maybe by the time I get back someone will have actually posted a zero to 60 time.
BTW, in my personal opinion neither engine in an engineering marvel by any means. They are not 5 valves per cylinder, they are don't have titanium valves, they don't have 8000rpm redlines or racing heritages behind them. What they are however are options for the Fiero and good ones because they are easy to install and the overal end product is very nice. PBJ's turbo 4.9 and most 3800sc's will run with Ferrari's, Porsche's and Corvettes, and embarrass many of them. So, the days when the Fiero wasn't considered a performance platform are ended with either of these swaps (0-60 or any other measure).
I really don't see the point of arguing, it would be nice if we could just have some facts. Does ANYONE have any? Just curious...
IP: Logged
09:46 AM
topcat Member
Posts: 5486 From: Charleston SC Registered: Dec 2001
I missed J's earlyer post, mostly stock means stock pulley, stock cam, stock rockers, stock timing, just ported exhaust manifolds, 3"mandrel exhaust, and a mild tune. This is with AC system, power everything.
As for the time slip, I've got it (and several others) and could post if someone really wanted to question it, but seems like its right on track with whats to be expected.
Okay, got my 0-60 its three and a half mississippi's, thats a scientific unit of measurement for those who dont know. First gear pretty much gets you there...
IP: Logged
02:02 PM
LZeppelin513 Member
Posts: 761 From: Lake Stevens, Washington Registered: Aug 2003
I am sorry this started a war, I didnt mean for it. The reason i ask is because i found a 87 gt with a bad motor for 800 that i am gonna buy and want to swap a cheap engine but be as quick (or quicker) than ls1 fbodies. i want it to be reliable and cost effective but still doable for a rook like me, so thats why i decided on 4.9 or 3.8 sc. i will not be racing on a track but would love to smoke other cars at the stoplights, AND get good fuel economy. so for me 0-60 is a more reasonable way to see which engine would perform in a matter i would enjoy. I say slightly built 4.9 because it seems to be a cheaper engine and swap, so with the few hundred bucks i would have that i didnt if i did the 3.8 sc i could throw at the 4.9. I said mostly stock 3.8 because i doubt i would want to put any more mony into it besides the exhaust, and maybe some headers. I really appriciate the comments but am still not sure wich is a quicker engine from 0-60 based on these posts....
I am sorry this started a war, I didnt mean for it. The reason i ask is because i found a 87 gt with a bad motor for 800 that i am gonna buy and want to swap a cheap engine but be as quick (or quicker) than ls1 fbodies. i want it to be reliable and cost effective but still doable for a rook like me, so thats why i decided on 4.9 or 3.8 sc. i will not be racing on a track but would love to smoke other cars at the stoplights, AND get good fuel economy. so for me 0-60 is a more reasonable way to see which engine would perform in a matter i would enjoy. I say slightly built 4.9 because it seems to be a cheaper engine and swap, so with the few hundred bucks i would have that i didnt if i did the 3.8 sc i could throw at the 4.9. I said mostly stock 3.8 because i doubt i would want to put any more mony into it besides the exhaust, and maybe some headers. I really appriciate the comments but am still not sure wich is a quicker engine from 0-60 based on these posts....
Well, you are going to have fun with either engine, as they both make alot more power than the stock 2.8... just think about the future though, when you want to do more, which engine is more upgradable, cheaper to upgrade and going to get you there faster in the long run?
The answer is the Engine that came with boost.
IP: Logged
03:33 PM
Zac88GT Member
Posts: 1026 From: Victoria BC Registered: Nov 2004
I believe there's already been a 0-60 time posted for a stock 4.9. It was mine at 5.391 seconds (from G-Tech Pro RR). Now if people would stop their bickering, post some actual times, and let the man decide which one he wants, this thread wont be a total waste of space.
IP: Logged
03:58 PM
jstricker Member
Posts: 12956 From: Russell, KS USA Registered: Apr 2002
My timeslip showed a 8.96 74.63 mph 1/8 mile and a 5.692 330' time so I'd say that your 5.4 time is pretty reasonable for a stock 4.9. While FieroX's times are great, that has been for a long, long time far from a stock engine for a 3800 sc so while admirable, they don't really relate to the discussion here.
86GT's car seems to be the only one that's been discussed here that is really "mostly stock". I have no problems believing his 1/4 mile times. After all, the 3800 sc DOES have more power, stock for stock, than the 4.9. The exhaust is a necessary by-product of the swap, IMHO, and anyone doing it would probably do about the same thing. The big thing I was wondering on his time was when he said "mostly stock" was whether or not he'd swapped a pulley on the blower, but he answered that question a few posts above this.
However I sincerely doubt a STOCK 3800sc is getting anything like a 3.5 sec 0-60.
John Stricker
quote
Originally posted by Zac88GT:
I believe there's already been a 0-60 time posted for a stock 4.9. It was mine at 5.391 seconds (from G-Tech Pro RR). Now if people would stop their bickering, post some actual times, and let the man decide which one he wants, this thread wont be a total waste of space.
IP: Logged
04:09 PM
vafierro Member
Posts: 349 From: Newport News, VA Registered: Oct 2005
Reference 0-60 times. Just to know about where you stand. (Hoping to play with the big boys myself )
1999 Chevrolet Corvette LS1 Hardtop 5.00 s 2002 Porsche 911 Targa 5.00 s 1993 Mazda RX-7 Twin Turbo 5.00 s 2001 Holden GTS R (Aus) 5.00 s 2002 Mercedes-Benz C 32 AMG 5.00 s 1989 Pontiac Trans Am Turbo 5.10 s 2002 Audi S8 Quattro 5.10 s 1996 Aston Martin DB7 5.10 s 2001 Mercedes-Benz CLK 55 AMG 5.10 s 2001 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra 5.16 s 2004 Pontiac GTO 5.7 5.17 s 1997 Acura NSX-T 5.20 s 1994 Dodge Stealth R/T Turbo 5.20 s 2001 Panoz Esperante 5.20 s 1996 Nissan Skyline GT-R (R33) 5.24 s 2004 Subaru Forester 2.5XT Turbo 5.25 s 2003 Ford Mustang Mach 1 5.29 s 1970 Oldsmobile 4-4-2 W-30 5.30 s 2001 Porsche Boxster S 5.30 s 2002 Subaru Impreza WRX Sedan AccessECU1 5.32 s 2003 Dodge Neon SRT-4 5.34 s 2007 Infiniti G35 Sport Sedan 5.35 s 1995 Acura NSX 5.36 s 1969 Dodge Super Bee 383 5.37 s 2004 Harley-Davidson Sportster 1200 Roadster 5.37 s 2003 Nissan 350Z Track 5.38 s 1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.40 s
<STOCK 4.9 Caddy Fiero>
2001 Audi S4 Quattro 5.40 s 1994 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.46 s 2001 Jaguar XKR 5.50 s 1987 Buick Regal Grand National GNX 5.50 s 2003 Infiniti G35 Coupe 5.50 s 1997 BMW M3 5.50 s 1995 Ford Escort RS Cosworth (UK) 5.50 s 1973 Porsche 911 Carrera RS 5.50 s 1994 BMW 850 CSi 5.51 s 2007 Acura TL Type-S 5.52 s 2003 BMW Z4 3.0i 5.60 s 2003 Porsche Boxster S 5.60 s 1993 Nissan 300ZX Turbo 5.68 s 1968 Chevrolet Corvette L88 5.69 s 2001 BMW 330 xi 5.70 s 1969 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 396 5.71 s 2003 BMW 330 Ci Coupe 5.73 s 2003 Acura 3.2CL Type-S 5.80 s 2002 Subaru Impreza WRX Sedan 17" 5.89 s 2002 Subaru Impreza WRX Sedan 5.90 s 2005 Pontiac Grand Prix GXP 5.93 s 2004 Mazda RX-8 5.96 s 2002 BMW 745i 5.96 s 1989 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z 350 5.97 s 2003 Infiniti M45 5.98 s 2002 Infiniti Q45 6.00 s
[This message has been edited by vafierro (edited 03-22-2007).]
IP: Logged
04:59 PM
My Blue 1986 SE Member
Posts: 31 From: Hampden, Maine, USA Registered: Jan 2007
The only reason that Supra smoked the 'Vette in that vid, was probably because the guy spent a small fortune on the engine alone... Who can guess how much he's spent on the entire car? Probably several thousand more.
Now I've only done a couple races with my Fiero, with the mostly stock 2.8... And my philosophy is that the Fiero is more about handling than power... Sure, drag racing is fun, but it's only one form of expression. Now the first race I did with my Fiero, was against a friend and his stock 200? Nissan Sentra XE, a 1.8 liter four-banger... Despite being a somewhat larger car, and having 2 less cylinders, he kept up pretty well... Until I hit 3rd and dusted him.
The next race was against a friends friend and his 3 - something liter V6 Mustang... I can almost guarantee you that the only reason I lost was because he had a 5-speed, and I only had a 3-speed auto-box... Although I have to say the conditions weren't very good either... Very wet, and I almost lost control a couple times.
Now, put all three cars on a road course, on a good day, and there's no doubt in my mind that my Fiero could out-handle both the Sentra and the Mustang... Sure, the 'Stang might have better acceleration, but he'd lose a good amount of time in the corners... And I've taken some corners in both my town, and the highway, going about 50 - 55 mph... So I know the car handles really well.
Now sure, power is good, but it's not what makes a car really shine... Putting together a good looking, well handling and well performing car, that is balanced and can hang with the occasional displacement-monger... Is in my eyes, much more rewarding, if not slightly drawn out.
I know this thread was originally about 0 - 60 times, and since my Fiero is still stock, I'll post the stock numbers... For all stock Fieros, 4 and 6 cylinder.
This is from an article run by Grassroots Motorsports.
I've left out the last few sets of statistics, since this thread has apparently shifted more towards the power end of the spectrum... The handling stats can be found with the following link.
Yeah, no way a 180 HP car runs a quarter mile in 12 seconds. Look at a lotus Elise, it has what 180HP and it doesn't run 12's, and that car weighs 2000lbs?
------------------ 1988 Purple Fiero GTw/SC3800 conversion Best ET with 3.0 pulley,XPHOT cam, SS I/C and 105lb Valve springs: 12.38@110mph Best 60 Foot ever: 1.699
IP: Logged
09:11 PM
PFF
System Bot
PURPLE REIGN Member
Posts: 4080 From: Minnesnowta ------------------ Land of White Gold Registered: Sep 2002
I'm gonna do it at my place, but I will be up at the shop to put the summer wheels on the benz, and install my new roof spoiler.
you're just NOW doing that? i put mine on last week, just before i had to drive through snow up north grrrr. maybe i'll stop in for a few minutes then.
and now back to your regularily scheduled thread about cars faster than mine
I am trying to figure out why the question was about the 0-60 time? It is usually about the 1/4 time, the torque, the HP but never the 0-60 time. I have never timed my 0-60 with my 3800SC car but it doesnt take very long. I guess the traction issue would make a big diffeance in the time you can pull off.
IP: Logged
09:23 AM
PFF
System Bot
Mar 24th, 2007
SOULCRUSHER Member
Posts: 1012 From: Waldorf, MD Registered: May 2004
Well, for one thing it is near impossible to get a accurate 0-60 time. You CAN"T go by the speedo and a stopwatch. Too much room for error, and the speedo is inaccurate on acceleration anyway. Yeah, you can use a G-Tech, but you will only get a ballpark figure. You would need the expensive equipment the magazines use to get an accurate measure. Maybe you should use 1/8th mile times. Everyone that has a 1/4 mile slip should also have a 1/8th mile time.
------------------ 1988 Purple Fiero GTw/SC3800 conversion Best ET with 3.0 pulley,XPHOT cam, SS I/C and 105lb Valve springs: 12.38@110mph Best 60 Foot ever: 1.699
IP: Logged
07:45 AM
PURPLE REIGN Member
Posts: 4080 From: Minnesnowta ------------------ Land of White Gold Registered: Sep 2002
I am trying to figure out why the question was about the 0-60 time? It is usually about the 1/4 time, the torque, the HP but never the 0-60 time. I have never timed my 0-60 with my 3800SC car but it doesnt take very long. I guess the traction issue would make a big diffeance in the time you can pull off.
I'm guessing the guy is interested in seeing what the 2 conversions will do in reality on the street. 0-60 is still safe & legal, street racing a 1/4 mile isn't.
On a side note, I have ridden in Eric's 4.9 ( even though it runs PIG rich ) and I've driven Dick Edzards 3800 SC after I built it. The 3800SC only had WCF headers and a chip by Darth. No other upgrades and it even ran with the stock 2.8 exhaust. Even though there was some clutch slippage with the 3800sc and if the 4.9 ( John Deer ) were running beside it, I think the 3800sc would be staring at a set of taillights with " PONTIAC " on them.
Keep in mind thats a built 4.9 vs a stock 3800SC
Personally the built 4.9 will kick the sh$t out of most anything light to light.
------------------ MINNESOTA MAFIA 87 GT MP-112 powered, 3800 Supercharged on 19's 88 GT T-top 1 of very few, 119.4 miles 87 GT custom 90 Grand prix STE Turbo IF YOU AIN'T BREAKING STUFF..................IT AIN'T MODDED ENOUGH
[This message has been edited by PURPLE REIGN (edited 03-24-2007).]
I would think neither would get very good 0-60 times due to traction. Specially on street tires. But i've never driven mine stock so i don't know how good traction is.
OMG.................My heart................My HEART....................I can't believe what I just read. What's next, cats and dogs, living together in peace and harmony??
John Stricker
quote
Originally posted by PURPLE REIGN:
I'm guessing the guy is interested in seeing what the 2 conversions will do in reality on the street. 0-60 is still safe & legal, street racing a 1/4 mile isn't.
On a side note, I have ridden in Eric's 4.9 ( even though it runs PIG rich ) and I've driven Dick Edzards 3800 SC after I built it. The 3800SC only had WCF headers and a chip by Darth. No other upgrades and it even ran with the stock 2.8 exhaust. Even though there was some clutch slippage with the 3800sc and if the 4.9 ( John Deer ) were running beside it, I think the 3800sc would be staring at a set of taillights with " PONTIAC " on them.
Keep in mind thats a built 4.9 vs a stock 3800SC
Personally the built 4.9 will kick the sh$t out of most anything light to light.
IP: Logged
08:55 PM
PURPLE REIGN Member
Posts: 4080 From: Minnesnowta ------------------ Land of White Gold Registered: Sep 2002
OMG.................My heart................My HEART....................I can't believe what I just read. What's next, cats and dogs, living together in peace and harmony??
John Stricker
Funny ............wise guy what you fail to comprehend is a built 4.9 is being compared to a stock 6 CYLINDER. YES 6 CYLINDER !!!! P.S. BRING ON THE 8 CYLINDERS !!!!!!!!!!!
[This message has been edited by PURPLE REIGN (edited 03-24-2007).]
3800 with a pulley and (easiness easiness easiness) Will destroy a 4.9. 4.9 run out of breath around 5k unless you do some serious camming and other stuff. Who cares if it's V8 I'd rather swap a 600 HP 4G63 than an 8 cyclinder any day.
Hmm bud, do you know how many 4g63s actually suffer from crankwalk? It's less than 1%. And if you you get yourself a 6 bolt than no problemo. Stronger motor too.
I would think neither would get very good 0-60 times due to traction. Specially on street tires. But i've never driven mine stock so i don't know how good traction is.
with my LT1 I have no traction issues. In fact I cant light them up, it just hunkers down and goes. I can spin them, but it wont sit there and roast them.
If torque you're concerned with on that engine, you're just not dropping the clutch at a high enough RPM. 
)
